"Innovative nuances of evidential inadequacies, processual infirmities and interpretational subtleties, artfully advanced in defence, otherwise intangible and inconsequential, ought to be conscientiously cast aside with moral maturity and singular sensitivity to uphold the statutory sanctity , lest the coveted cause of justice is a causality," said the judgment of a high-profile political leader's corruption case last year.

And a 268-page judgment on a criminal defamation case, contained phrases such as "exposits cavil", "quintessential conceptuality" and "percipient discord".

Floridity isn't a new syndrome in legal writing. The late Justice V R 

Krishna Iyer

 - who would pepper his judgments with words like 'jejune' and 'logomachy'-was criticised by some and revered by many for his literary flourishes.
The problem is "everyone wants to emulate Justice Krishna Iyer without realising that they first need a command over the language," says Mumbai-based lawyer Mrunalini Deshmukh.

Various papers by Indian judges on the art of judgment writing insist on "brevity" and "clarity". "A judgment should unite reasoning and decision," says Upendra Baxi, professor of law at 

University of Warwick

 and 

University of Delhi

. "It should reserve one-third of the space for arguments, one-third for what has been said in preceding cases and one-third for the decision."

Last week, the SC remanded a case back to 

Rajasthan High Court

 after it found the judgment neither set out facts nor gave any reasons for the conclusions reached. "Nothing should be put below the carpet in the judgment," says 84-year-old Justice (retd) D R Dhanuka, who used to correct some of his own judgment drafts five times for improvements. Chiefly, a judgment serves two purposes, according to Justice (retd) P C Agarwal. "It is meant for the judge to safeguard himself against his own self (biases) and it lets the defeat ed party know why they lost," he says